Jordan Eberle had a great 2011-12 season. However, his goal-scoring was largely shooting percentage-based – does that mean it’s going to drop off, or is Eberle one of the league’s rare high-percentage shooters?

To try and answer that question, I decided to look at a group of 15 players since the mid-1990’s who had posted shooting percentage totals similar to Jordan Eberle over their first two seasons. The list is as follows, with the group average compared to Eberle’s totals over his first two seasons at the bottom:

Rk

Player

From

To

GP

G

A

PTS

S

S%

1

Mark Parrish

1999

2000

154

50

31

81

281

17.8

2

Jonathan Toews

2008

2009

146

58

65

123

339

17.1

3

Paul Stastny

2007

2008

148

52

97

149

323

16.1

4

Alexander Radulov

2007

2008

145

44

51

95

279

15.8

5

Evgeni Malkin

2007

2008

160

80

111

191

514

15.6

6

Steven Stamkos

2009

2010

161

74

67

141

478

15.5

7

Lee Stempniak

2006

2007

139

41

38

79

266

15.4

8

Thomas Vanek

2006

2007

163

68

64

132

441

15.4

9

Ilya Kovalchuk

2002

2003

146

67

51

118

441

15.2

10

Ryan Malone

2004

2006

158

44

43

87

292

15.1

11

Dany Heatley

2002

2003

159

67

89

156

454

14.8

12

Martin Havlat

2001

2002

145

41

51

92

278

14.7

13

Alexander Semin

2004

2007

129

48

47

95

335

14.3

14

Sidney Crosby

2006

2007

160

75

147

222

528

14.2

15

Jonathan Cheechoo

2003

2004

147

37

26

63

269

13.8

Average

151

56

65

121

368

15.3

*

Jordan Eberle

2011

2012

147

52

67

119

338

15.4

As we can see, the averages compare very well to Eberle’s two-year totals, so this would seem to be a comparable group. How did they do in their third NHL season?

To answer that question, I’ve nixed Alexander Radulov (he left for Russia after his second NHL season) and gathered the numbers for this group’s third year:

Player

GP

G

SH

SH%

Mark Parrish

70

17

123

13.8%

Jonathan Toews

76

25

202

12.4%

Paul Stastny

45

11

118

9.3%

Evgeni Malkin

82

35

290

12.1%

Steven Stamkos

82

45

272

16.5%

Lee Stempniak

80

13

162

8.0%

Thomas Vanek

82

36

240

15.0%

Ilya Kovalchuk

81

41

341

12.0%

Ryan Malone

64

16

125

12.8%

Dany Heatley

31

13

83

15.7%

Martin Havlat

67

24

179

13.4%

Alexander Semin

63

26

185

14.1%

Sidney Crosby

53

24

173

13.9%

Jonathan Cheechoo

82

56

317

17.7%

Total

958

382

2810

13.6%

Average

68

27

201

13.6%

The games played total is lower, but I wouldn’t read too much into that – it’s really a function of three players (Stastny, Heatley and Crosby) missing time in their third seasons. Overall, shooting percentage fell significantly – Stamkos and Cheechoo were the significant exceptions, though Cheechoo would fall off the map over the next two seasons – but an increase in shot rates made up the vast majority of the difference.

Based on this group, we would expect Jordan Eberle to see a jump in total shots, a slight dip in shooting percentage, and maintain similar goal-scoring numbers next season. Or would we?

The Other Way of Looking At It

In our initial look at this problem, we considered the first and second years of these players as one sample, not bothering to split up those two seasons to see how much progress each player made. If we do that, how does Eberle compare to the average?

Player

1GP

1G

1S

1SH%

2GP

2G

2S

2SH%

Mark Parrish

73

24

129

18.6%

81

26

152

17.1%

Jonathan Toews

64

24

144

16.7%

82

34

195

17.4%

Paul Stastny

82

28

185

15.1%

66

24

138

17.4%

Evgeni Malkin

78

33

242

13.6%

82

47

272

17.3%

Steven Stamkos

79

23

181

12.7%

82

51

297

17.2%

Lee Stempniak

57

14

100

14.0%

82

27

166

16.3%

Thomas Vanek

81

25

204

12.3%

82

43

237

18.1%

Ilya Kovalchuk

65

29

184

15.8%

81

38

257

14.8%

Ryan Malone

81

22

139

15.8%

77

22

153

14.4%

Dany Heatley

82

26

202

12.9%

77

41

252

16.3%

Martin Havlat

73

19

133

14.3%

72

22

145

15.2%

Alexander Semin

52

10

92

10.9%

77

38

243

15.6%

Sidney Crosby

81

39

278

14.0%

79

36

250

14.4%

Jonathan Cheechoo

66

9

94

9.6%

81

28

175

16.0%

Average

72

23

160

14.3%

79

34

208

16.1%

Jordan Eberle

69

18

158

11.4%

78

34

180

18.9%

In the first year, things look very comparable – Eberle’s shooting percentage (and consequently his goal-scoring) is a bit lower than the group average, but overall he’s in the range. The group managed 2.22 shots/game, on average; Eberle managed 2.30.

In year two, things change dramatically – because while our average group enjoys a modest bump in shooting percentage and a big bump in shots-per-game (they go from 2.22 shots/game up to 2.63 shots/game), Eberle sees no increase in shots-per-game and a massive increase in shooting percentage. Eberle literally goes from firing 2.30 shots per game in his rookie season to 2.31 as a sophomore.

The fact that Eberle’s increase – unlike our group average – is based on shooting percentage and not an increase in shots is troubling, because it raises doubts that his shot totals will increase in the same manner that the group as a whole did. We also know, barely short of a certainty, that his shooting percentage is going to fall from his second year totals.

Knowing what we do, there are three individuals on the chart above worth looking at in more detail: Paul Stastny, Sidney Crosby and Jonathan Cheechoo. What makes those three interesting?

Stastny and Crosby are of interest because they’re the only two players from our sample to see their shot totals in their second season either decrease or show zero growth. Every other player saw their shot totals improve significantly. In both cases, the players went on to show negligible growth over the rest of their careers to date. Stastny fired 2.26 shots/game as a rookie, while on his career he’s fired 2.37 shots/game; Crosby fired 3.43 shots/game as a rookie and his career average currently sits at 3.39 shots/game.

Cheechoo is of interest because he’s the only player on this list with a similar improvement in shooting percentage. Like Eberle – and like nobody else on this list – his shooting percentage jumped ~160 percent from year one to year two. In Cheechoo’s case, he was able to ride the shooting percentage wave for one more season before a long, slow, slide pushed him into the AHL. In his last NHL season (with Ottawa in 2009-10) he scored five goals on 117 shots (4.27 SH%) and he’s now been an ~11% shooter over two AHL seasons.

What are you saying!?!?

It’s important not to draw too firm a conclusion from the players we’ve looked at above – this is a small group and it gets smaller when we look at three individuals who relate to Eberle in some way. However, based on this data, if I had to project how Eberle fares next season I’d go with the following:

A small increase in shots/game

A large decrease in shooting percentage

A significant decrease in goals scored

If I’m forced to pick a number? Over a full season I’d guess Eberle fires the puck ~190 times and scores ~26 goals. There’s any number of ways that could be wrong – particularly if Eberle finds a way to increase the number of shots he takes this season in a significant way – but if I were drawing a line in the sand that’s where I’d put it. I do not expect him to match 2011-12's totals in 2012-13.

Jonathan Willis is a freelance writer.
He currently works for Oilers Nation, Sportsnet, the Edmonton Journal and Bleacher Report.
He's co-written three books and worked for myriad websites, including Grantland, ESPN, The Score, and Hockey Prospectus. He was previously the founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue.

This same methodology was trotted out before last season to suggest that Jones was going to fall off a cliff. On the contrary, he astounded and disgusted stats guys across the Oilogosphere throughout the year.

Why is it that those same people simply cannot fathom the fact that talent often overrides the logical argument? With another year's experience under his belt and (hopefully) more experienced linemates (*cough* Hall...*cough* Gagner), you could just as easly suggest Eberle will have another great season. Maybe, MAYBE he's just that good.

Numbers don't often capture the intangibles of an outlier, which Eberle could certainly be. I feel sad for people who can't appreciate the beauty of sport because they're so myopically focused "on the numbers". For the love of god man, what does your gut say?

This same methodology was trotted out before last season to suggest that Jones was going to fall off a cliff. On the contrary, he astounded and disgusted stats guys across the Oilogosphere throughout the year.

Why is it that those same people simply cannot fathom the fact that talent often overrides the logical argument? With another year's experience under his belt and (hopefully) more experienced linemates (*cough* Hall...*cough* Gagner), you could just as easly suggest Eberle will have another great season. Maybe, MAYBE he's just that good.

Numbers don't often capture the intangibles of an outlier, which Eberle could certainly be. I feel sad for people who can't appreciate the beauty of sport because they're so myopically focused "on the numbers". For the love of god man, what does your gut say?

I like this guy.

The main reason I love watching sports is the unpredictable nature of it. I love getting blown away when the unexpected happens.

Stats are great but I only look at them after the fact. I want it to summarize the game not predict it for me. But what do I know, I use a loonie to pick my playoff teams.

Like the old saying goes... there are three types of sports fans, those who like numbers and those who don't.

Zone starts and quality of competition for Eberle are both very favourable - as you know. You also know that we only have data on those two items going back to 2007. So not only do you cite a pair of factors that work against your own argument, but you site a pair of factors that we can't really test for over NHL history.

As for TOI, it's an argument that sounds good but is less impressive once you dig into it. Eberle has played 2593 minutes of NHL ice-time and scored 52 goals over his first two seasons. Now, since 1998-99 (when the NHL's TOI data started being made publicly available) the league has seen 12 players with similar shooting totals over their first two seasons score between 47 and 57 goals in that span. Their average ice-time? 2568 minutes.

Feel free to bring up any other complaints you had. One piece of advice: try doing a *tiny* bit of research first to make sure they're valid.

This same methodology was trotted out before last season to suggest that Jones was going to fall off a cliff. On the contrary, he astounded and disgusted stats guys across the Oilogosphere throughout the year.

Why is it that those same people simply cannot fathom the fact that talent often overrides the logical argument? With another year's experience under his belt and (hopefully) more experienced linemates (*cough* Hall...*cough* Gagner), you could just as easly suggest Eberle will have another great season. Maybe, MAYBE he's just that good.

Numbers don't often capture the intangibles of an outlier, which Eberle could certainly be. I feel sad for people who can't appreciate the beauty of sport because they're so myopically focused "on the numbers". For the love of god man, what does your gut say?

He could very well be an outlier.

The point is that we will have to be one to put up similar goal totals next season.

I stand corrected. You are right and my comment was too precise. What I meant was several stats guys went on and on and ON at length last year about Jones' unsustainable performance (relating I believe to shooting percentage - could be wrong).

The point is it's a trap of comfort with numbers. Maybe Jones is just realy good at his sort of game and Eberle the same, albeit in a different way. In that manner they may be outliers, where numeric logic becomes unreliable at best. But to come out and say Eberle is going to fall back? He could just as easily hit for 80 this year with the right linemates and ice time. Why is that so hard to believe?

Contrast this post with mc79's post on Sutton, which is basically bulletproof from an advanced stats analysis because it is a complete analysis. He considers all the options and variables and shows by each is relevant or not relevant in evaluating Sutton's performing.

You can claimed to be an advance stats guy and put out such a superficial, incomplete, handwaving analysis as this one.

I take it that you want to take advanced stats seriously, and you want to be an advanced stats guy.

Well, that means you can't be a pageview whore, and put out quickie shoddy analysis or you discredit the advanced stats field, and diminish your credibility as an advance stats guy.

You've left gaping holes in this Eberle analysis. It is not worth even having an opinion on because there are variables you did not even bother to consider.

For an analysis to be valid you have to show not only why the variables you have chosen are important, but why other variable are not important to the analysis.

In this post, you clearly have not done that.

It was a Willis, pageview whore post, and not a Willis, serious advanced stats guru post.

Ultimately you are going to have to make a choice between those two hats.

A serious advanced stats guy is ultimately not going to be able to slum as a pageview whore.

Gosh, godot10, I didn't realize I had to live my life in boxes drawn by you.

While we're at it, what should I have for dinner? I've been an omnivore for most of my life, but I'm sick of living in two worlds. Should I embrace the nature-loving, shower/shave-hating hippy lifestyle and become a full-fledged vegan, or eat nothing but steak for the remainder of my days?

Ultimately I'll need to make a choice, and I've come to accept the fact that you're the only person with the authority to dictate the way I do things.

@David S: It sounds like what you're saying is that fact-based analysis is useful only when it conforms to what our gut is telling us.

But I agree with your greater point: remember that Cogliano's rookie shooting percentage was considered to be an aberration, and what did he do? He followed it up with another high-percentage season, that's what he did. And he's been a consistent 15-18% shooter ever since! Clearly counting on a player bucking the trend is less fallible than assuming he regresses to his peer group average.

John Tavares shooting % went down 2% from 9/10 to 11/12 but he scored 7 more goals because he took 100 more shots.

Jeff Carter's shot totals went 215, 260, 342 in consecutive years.

James Neal's shot totals went from on pace for 225 in his second season to 329 last year.

Zac Parise's shot totals went 247, 266, 364 in consecutive years.

Taylor Hall was on pace for 278 shots last year. Eberle took 180. What is stopping Eberle from taking 278 next year? You've pulled out the numbers to examine his shooting percentage but have no basis that I've seen to back up why you don't think his shot totals will increase. 180 shots is ridiculously low. He will shoot more. All good young hockey players learn to shoot more (except maybe Hemsky).

Steven Stamkos shooting percentage has been 17.2, 16.5, 19.8 his last three years. Taking averages is fine but for every low there is a high and no reason why Eberle won't be one of the highs. Stamkos has sustained it. It is possible for Eberle to as well. I doubt it as well but could still see 14.5%. With 235 shots that's still 34 goals.

The Oilers are an improving team. Schultz, an improving Petry, a healthy Whitney, the puck should be moving in the proper direction a lot more than last year. When injuries hit, Eberle was keyed on heavily but with a healthy Hall and the addition of Yakupov that shouldn't happen this year. I still see him scoring 30+.

Just curious Jonathan, if you project his goals to go down, what do you think will happen points wise?

Keep in mind Eberle only played 17m a night this season. I agree his production will likely drop but I wouldn't be surprised to see him get more shots just from an increase in icetime alone, let alone making the conscious decision to shoot more.

Great article, the argument is sound. I love Eberle as much as the next guy (and I sincerely hope he breaks Wayne Gretzky's goal scoring record next season), but it's a statistical prediction people it's not a damn condemnation of the guy...

The guy who's shots went up dramatically in his third season is none other than Wayne Gretzky. Not only did his shots per game go up around one per game but his shooting percentage increased dramatically as well. Eberle is no Gretzky, but he is clutch around the net. I say 250 shots, 15% for 38 goals, highest Oiler total since Smyth's 39 in 96-97, except Hall is cracking 40, first Oiler since '91 to do so.

I agree with Br91's second point: You have to consider the TYPE of goals Eberle scores, because a simple shooting percentage doesn't capture all the variables.

Many of Eberle's shots are very high quality, because of the way he carries/controls the puck. How many times does he wait until two or three defenders AND the goaltender are laying on the ice before he shoots into an open net?

When he scored the goal of the year (!) in his first NHL game, people said he was lucky. His highlight reel for the last two seasons says otherwise, and that doesn't show the 2-3 similar opportunities per game that he DOESN'T score on. He will continue to create this type of opportunity, likely at the same rate, and I don't see his percentage going down on those type of goals.

The second type of goal he scores are finishing shots after passing plays. He's unlikely a) to be on the receiving end of fewer passes in the next year, and just as unlikely b) to start missing open nets more than he already does.

The third type of goal he scores are laser-accurate shots from difficult and sneaky angles. His shooting percentage might go down in this category, but because defenders are aware of his explosive linemates and his ability to create chances in the first two categories above, Eberle will continue to catch goalies and defencemen cheating, so I think his numbers in this category of goal last year are not really as lucky as they appear.

My prediction: Eberle's shot total and shooting percentage in the last two years were not an anomaly. He will score at the same pace as last year for several years to come. He won't be a 50-goal scorer, but a solid 30-40 goal man.